Advertisement

Valuing the flexibility of flexible manufacturing systems with fast decision rules

  • Markus Feurstein
  • Martin Natter
2 Modification Tasks Knowledge-Based Control Systems
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1416)

Abstract

We compare the use of stochastic dynamic programming (SDP), Neural Networks and a simple approximation rule for calculating the real option value of a flexible production system. While SDP yields the best solution to the problem, it is computationally prohibitive for larger settings. We test two approximations of the value function and show that the results are comparable to those obtained via SDP. These methods have the advantage of a high computational performance and of no restrictions on the type of process used. Our approach is not only useful for supporting large investment decisions, but it can also be applied in the case of routine decisions like the determination of the production program when stochastic profit margins occur.

Keywords

Real Options Neural Networks Capital Budgeting Simulated Annealing Flexible Manufacturing Systems Dynamic Programming 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Aarts and Korst (1989)]
    Aarts, E.H.L. and Korst, J., Simulated Annealing and Boltzmann Machines. Wiley, 1989.Google Scholar
  2. [Dixit and Pindyck (1993)]
    Dixit, A., Pindyck, R., Investment Under Uncertainty, Princeton, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. [Geske and Shastri (1985)]
    Geske R. and Shastri K., Valuation by Approximation: A Comparison of Alternative Valuation Techniques, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 20 (1), 45–71, March 1985.Google Scholar
  4. [Jones and Ostroy (1984)]
    Jones, R.A. and J.M. Ostroy, Flexibility and Uncertainty, Rev. Econ. Studies, vol. LI, pp. 13–32, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. [Kamrad (1995)]
    Kamrad B., A Lattice Claims Model for Capital Budgeting, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 42, 140–149, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. [Kulatilaka (1988)]
    Kulatilaka N., Valuing the Flexibility of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 35, 250–257, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. [Kulatilaka (1995a)]
    Kulatilaka N., The Value of Flexibility: A General Model of Real Options. In: L. Trigeorgis, editor, Real Options in Capital Investment — Models, Strategies, and Applications, Praeger, 87–107, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. [Kulatilaka (1995b)]
    Kulatilaka, N., Operating Flexibilities in Capital Budgeting: Substitutability and Complementarity. In L. Trigeorgis, editor, Real Options in Capital Investment — Models, Strategies, and Applications, Praeger, 121–132, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. [Kirkpatrick et al. (1983)]
    Kirkpatrick, S., C.D. Gelatt, and M.P. Vecchi, Optimization by Simulated Annealing. Science, Vol. 220, No. 4598, 671–680, 1983.Google Scholar
  10. [Lint (1992)]
    Lint, O., Real Options Analysis in Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 145–152, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. [Mitchell (1990)]
    Mitchell, G.R., Alternative frameworks for technology strategy, European Journal of Operations Research, Nr. 47, 153–161, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. [Ripley (1993)]
    Ripley, B.D., Statistical Aspects of Neural Networks. In: Barndorff-Nielsen, O.E., Jensen, J.L. and Kendall, W.S., editors, Networks and Chaos — Statistical and Probabilistic Aspects. London, Chapman & Hall, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. [White (1989)]
    White, H., Connectionist Nonparametric Regression: Multilayer Feedforward Networks Can Learn Arbitrary Mappings. Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Markus Feurstein
    • 1
  • Martin Natter
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial Information ProcessingVienna University of Economics & Business AdministrationViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations